AirWillie6475
Topic Author
Posts: 2372
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 1:45 pm

A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Sun Dec 10, 2006 2:31 pm

All I can say is wow, firefighters not that well prepared. Skip the first 4 minutes then play.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhMEN959voE
 
User avatar
EK413
Posts: 4392
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:11 pm

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Sun Dec 10, 2006 4:26 pm

Lets hope we get better results with the A380 RTO!

EK413
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
 
kearney
Posts: 137
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 3:46 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Sun Dec 10, 2006 4:50 pm

Is it common for the tires to blow on the average RTO? Id expect the brakes to smoke from the heat but not go as far as to blow the tires. Note how the tires blow out the sides, good to know when you approach an aircraft with hot brakes!
 
PADSpot
Posts: 1637
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 11:31 pm

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Sun Dec 10, 2006 5:15 pm

That's a repost, guys ... it came numerous times already. Last time just two weeks ago.
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Sun Dec 10, 2006 5:26 pm

Quoting AirWillie6475 (Thread starter):
firefighters not that well prepared.

Actually if this a certification test, they aren't allowed to intervene for 3 minutes.

Quoting Kearney (Reply 2):
Is it common for the tires to blow on the average RTO?

There is a great video of the 747 RTO test where they are exploding pieces of rim up over the top of the aircraft.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
Silver1SWA
Crew
Posts: 4458
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 6:11 pm

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Sun Dec 10, 2006 8:24 pm

Quoting Kearney (Reply 2):
Note how the tires blow out the sides, good to know when you approach an aircraft with hot brakes!

That is why, in the case of a brake fire, we are trained never to approach from the sides. Always approach from the front or rear of the tires.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
User avatar
LTU932
Posts: 13090
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 12:34 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:03 am

Quoting L-188 (Reply 4):
Actually if this a certification test, they aren't allowed to intervene for 3 minutes.

Wasn't it actually so that the aircraft, after the RTO, had to taxi under its own power for 5 minutes without anyone else intervening?

Anyway, those firefighters were indeed not properly prepared for this.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8652
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:17 am

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 6):

Wasn't it actually so that the aircraft, after the RTO, had to taxi under its own power for 5 minutes without anyone else intervening?

The aircraft must demonstrate that it can roll under its own power and demonstrate that the aircraft will not catch fire for 5 minutes after the RTO. This is assumed to be the time it would take airport emergency services to reach the airplane and cool the landing gear.

Obviously, the A346 in question failed the latter.

BTW - this is a repost of a threat no more than a month ago.
 
flyorski
Posts: 725
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 8:23 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:21 am

Amazing that the Fire department seemed to have no idea that the brakes would explode. The guy runs up there, then turns around and runs back.

Scary
"None are more hopelessly enslaved, than those who falsly believe they are free" -Goethe
 
User avatar
LTU932
Posts: 13090
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 12:34 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:25 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 7):
The aircraft must demonstrate that it can roll under its own power and demonstrate that the aircraft will not catch fire for 5 minutes after the RTO. This is assumed to be the time it would take airport emergency services to reach the airplane and cool the landing gear.

Thanks for the explanation.
 
trekster
Posts: 4319
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2003 2:47 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:32 am

Cool shots


 Smile

Dan
Where does the time go???
 
chuchoteur
Posts: 609
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 9:17 pm

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 6:05 am

safety valves on the tyres are supposed to prevent most blowouts... they should normally just deflate.

I remember an RTO exercise where somebody applied the park brake on the red hot bogies, resulting in the brakes melting onto the discs (nice).
had to put the a/c on trollies 'n tow back to the hangar for the assembly change... fun
 
N243NW
Posts: 1597
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2003 4:29 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 6:24 am

In this case, are the fuse plugs not installed/deactivated in order to let the tires explode? I would imagine that the deflation with the plugs installed would be much less violent. Interesting video.
-N243NW biggrin 
B-52s don't take off. They scare the ground away.
 
gearup
Posts: 514
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2000 9:23 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 6:24 am

Quoting Flyorski (Reply 8):
Amazing that the Fire department seemed to have no idea that the brakes would explode. The guy runs up there, then turns around and runs back.

Well it's not actually the brakes that were doing the exploding. As I understand it, the increased pressure within the tyre caused by the burning brakes made the wheel rims fail before the pressure fuse operated. This led to a redesign of the wheels. That firefighter was very lucky he was not hit by a piece of the wheel or a chunk of rubber. If the shrapnel can penetrate wings and engine cowlings, what would it do to a person. I believe the RTO test with the redesigned wheels was a success.

GU
I have no memory of this place.
 
keta
Posts: 405
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 7:14 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 6:54 am

Awesome video. For me too, it gives me the impression that the firefighters were not very well prepared.

Does somebody know, what temperature do brakes reach?
Where there's a will, there's a way
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 6:57 am

Quoting Keta (Reply 14):

Does somebody know, what temperature do brakes reach?

400F or more...

The brake energy on a RTO is measured in millions of foot-pounds....
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
User avatar
AA777223
Posts: 991
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 6:12 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:04 am

I was finding myself very frustrated that the one firefighter who went in hardly sprayed any foam on the bogie. He kept looking back, making hand gestures, etc but hardly sprayed any foam where it was needed most. The rest of the Firefighters seemed MIA.
A318/19/20/21, A300, A332/3, A343/6, A388, L1011, DC-9, DC-10, MD-11, MD-80, B722, B732/3/4/5/7/8/9, B743/4/4M, B752/3, B762/3/4, B772/E/W, B788/9, F-100, CRJ-200/700/900, ERJ-135/145/175, DH-8, ATR-72, DO-328, BAE-146
 
777fan
Posts: 2256
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 12:09 pm

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:31 am

It was funny (but alarming) to see the FFs roll out there with garden hoses. After the first explosion, the FF to the left seemed to be more concerned with the small piece of burning rubber at his feet as opposed to the inferno that was raging on the gear assemblies! Can't believe they didn't attack with foam from the get go.


777fan
DC-8 61/63/71 DC-9-30/50 MD-80/82/83 DC-10-10/30 MD-11 717 721/2 732/3/4/5/G/8/9 741/2/4 752 762/3 777 A306/319/20/33 AT
 
LimaNiner
Posts: 272
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 2:32 pm

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:39 am

Was this plane actually delivered to a customer after Airbus finished their testing?!?
 
ebj1248650
Posts: 1517
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 6:17 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:43 am

Quoting Kearney (Reply 2):
Is it common for the tires to blow on the average RTO? Id expect the brakes to smoke from the heat but not go as far as to blow the tires. Note how the tires blow out the sides, good to know when you approach an aircraft with hot brakes!

I know on some American designed airplanes, pressure seals blow when the heat gets too high and the tires deflate rather than exploding. This film caught me by surprise because I would have thought our European friends would design in a similar feature to prevent tire explosions.
Dare to dream; dream big!
 
AsstChiefMark
Posts: 10465
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 2:14 pm

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:51 am

I thought the universal airport fire department procedure states that when approaching an aircraft that is on fire or in which fire is imminent, you approach with pumps on and primed, boom extended, and all personnel in proper attire.



There's no way a couple of two-inch hand lines are going to handle burning metal wheels.

[Edited 2006-12-10 23:53:18]
Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Red tail...Damned MSP...Red tail...Red tail
 
swaopsusafatc
Posts: 109
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 6:20 pm

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 8:04 am

wow, rejected at 182KTS! Not suprised they blew eventually. That would be one heck of a high V1. What is the rule on min speed before reject for certification?
 
EMBQA
Posts: 7798
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:52 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 8:24 am

Quoting SWAOPSusafATC (Reply 21):
What is the rule on min speed before reject for certification?

It's done with Max Payload, Max speed... before Vr... and Max breaking...no TR's. The aircraft must come to a complete stop, start moving again under its own power, then wait for 3 minutes before the fire/rescue can approch. I was shocked the tires were not equiped with fuse plugs. I saw this same test on the B777 and the result was nothing like that. The fuse plus poped and the tires went flat with no explosion.

[Edited 2006-12-11 00:26:03]
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8652
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 8:30 am

Quoting EMBQA (Reply 22):
I saw this same test on the B777 and the result was nothing like that. The fuse plus poped and the tires went flat with no explosion.

If you notice toward the end of the video, most of the tires are flat, but no explosions or fire occur:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5N2uBqJbVU&mode=related&search=
 
AirEMS
Posts: 625
Joined: Mon May 17, 2004 6:34 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 8:40 am

Quoting AA777223 (Reply 16):
I was finding myself very frustrated that the one firefighter who went in hardly sprayed any foam on the bogie. He kept looking back, making hand gestures, etc but hardly sprayed any foam where it was needed most. The rest of the Firefighters seemed MIA.

From what I saw it looked like they were having a pressure problem and he was trying to get them to increase the pressure so that he could stay back and hit the fire..... I don't think that it was a lack of hose length but rather a defensive position in case of the tires blowing as occured... Imagine what would have happened if he had all the hose he wanted and got in even closer of the bogies... I forwarded this to a Friend who is a ARFF member for the Airforce to see what his thoughts are...

My one questions are there any noises that are made by the tires before they go to alert that they are about to blow? or is this a they just blow type of thing?

-Carl
If Your Dying Were Flying
 
777fan
Posts: 2256
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 12:09 pm

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 8:49 am

Quoting AsstChiefMark (Reply 20):
and all personnel in proper attire.

Ha, it the first guy to get in there appeared to be wearing a "Member's Only" jacket with reflective tape on it. What a joke.

777fan
DC-8 61/63/71 DC-9-30/50 MD-80/82/83 DC-10-10/30 MD-11 717 721/2 732/3/4/5/G/8/9 741/2/4 752 762/3 777 A306/319/20/33 AT
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 8:53 am

What I was wondering was why 4 fire trucks can be seen trailing the aircraft as it taxis in, yet we only see 1 fire fighter with 1 hose getting anywhere near close to the aircraft...

Maybe they came after 00:08:28 when the video ends...
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
dan2002
Posts: 2024
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2002 7:11 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 9:08 am

Quoting L-188 (Reply 4):
There is a great video of the 747 RTO test where they are exploding pieces of rim up over the top of the aircraft.

Link?
A guy asks 'What's Punk?'. I kick over a trash can and its punk. He knocks over a trash can and its trendy.
 
pygmalion
Posts: 818
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 12:47 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 9:11 am

The brakes get to 3000F not 400F and are white hot. The fuses should let go and let the air out prior to wheel fracture. Thats why they are there. Sometimes the wheels will fracture from the heat and the weight of the aircraft even with no pressure in them. As you can see, exploding wheels is no fun.

It is 5 minutes from full stop with no fire. Aircraft must be able to roll under its own power. Time is to ensure plane can clear runway and then evacuate as needed, and have the FD show up prior to becoming a fireball with full tanks. (This is full max take off weight so tanks would be full.)

Fire boys are told NOT to spray full stream at superheated brakes and wheels. That would be a great way to cause explosions etc. Think about dropping a hot pyrex pan into a bucket of ice water... not a good idea. Small spray of water cools.. large hard stream causes nasty things to happen. Foam won't do sh-t. They have to cool not drown. You can't smother extinguish a magnesium wheel fire with water (it would burn underwater) but you can cool it down enough to get it below burn temp by cooling it with spray that takes up heat by turning to steam.
 
LH526
Crew
Posts: 1960
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2000 2:23 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 9:23 am

Judging the amount of explosions, it's a A346/5 right? I'm amazed by the fact that the plane shoke quite heavy as the rather smaller tires burst in peaces.

Mario
LH526
Trittst im Morgenrot daher, seh ich dich im Strahlenmeer ...
 
User avatar
LTU932
Posts: 13090
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 12:34 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 9:26 am

Quoting LH526 (Reply 29):
Judging the amount of explosions, it's a A346/5 right?

Yes, it's the A346 prototype which was doing this RTO test.
 
pygmalion
Posts: 818
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 12:47 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 9:32 am

Bursting a tire that is 200psi at normal temps and then heating it to near 1000 degrees and letting it burst.... not a gentle experience
 
PH-TVH
Posts: 52
Joined: Sat May 26, 2001 1:07 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 10:13 am

Quoting EMBQA (Reply 22):
It's done with Max Payload, Max speed... before Vr... and Max breaking...no TR's. The aircraft must come to a complete stop, start moving again under its own power, then wait for 3 minutes before the fire/rescue can approch. I was shocked the tires were not equiped with fuse plugs. I saw this same test on the B777 and the result was nothing like that. The fuse plus poped and the tires went flat with no explosion.

And the brakes are not "fresh" either.
Been a while for me, but the brakes are worn down (simulated flight cycles) to their limits before put to the test.
 
gearup
Posts: 514
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2000 9:23 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 11:52 am

Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 19):
I know on some American designed airplanes, pressure seals blow when the heat gets too high and the tires deflate rather than exploding. This film caught me by surprise because I would have thought our European friends would design in a similar feature to prevent tire explosions.

They did, however the BFGoodrich wheel rims failed before the fuse plugs relieved the pressure in the tyres. They had to be redesigned to solve the issue. Airbus or the FD at the test airfield must have never heard of the concept of Health and safety to let a person approach the landing gear after such a brutal test.

GU
I have no memory of this place.
 
User avatar
AA777223
Posts: 991
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 6:12 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 1:28 pm

Quoting Pygmalion (Reply 28):
They have to cool not drown. You can't smother extinguish a magnesium wheel fire with water (it would burn underwater)

What? Are you sure? I have never heard of anything "Burning under water" I think thats impossible. The only oxygen present in water, is in the actual water molecule, and I don't think you are going to split a water molecule with a magnesium wheel fire. I may be way off, but that just sounds implausible to me.
A318/19/20/21, A300, A332/3, A343/6, A388, L1011, DC-9, DC-10, MD-11, MD-80, B722, B732/3/4/5/7/8/9, B743/4/4M, B752/3, B762/3/4, B772/E/W, B788/9, F-100, CRJ-200/700/900, ERJ-135/145/175, DH-8, ATR-72, DO-328, BAE-146
 
robsawatsky
Posts: 477
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 7:07 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 1:53 pm

From wikipedia.org:

"Magnesium metal and alloys are highly flammable in their pure form when molten, as a powder, or in ribbon form. Burning or molten magnesium metal reacts violently with water. Magnesium powder is an explosive hazard. One should wear safety glasses while working with magnesium. The bright white light (including ultraviolet) produced by burning magnesium can damage the eyes. Water should not be used to extinguish magnesium fires, because it can actually feed the fire, according to the reaction:[2]

Mg (s) + 2 H2O (g) → Mg(OH)2 (aq) + H2 (g)
or in words:
Magnesium (solid) + steam → Magnesium hydroxide (aqueous) + Hydrogen (gas)

Carbon dioxide fire extinguishers should not be used either, because magnesium can burn in carbon dioxide (forming magnesium oxide, MgO, and carbon).[3] A Class D dry chemical fire extinguisher should be used if available, or else the fire should be covered with sand or magnesium foundry flux. An easy way to put out small metal fires is to place a polyethene bag filled with dry sand on top of the fire. The heat of the fire will melt the bag and the sand will flow out onto the fire."
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:01 pm

Quoting AA777223 (Reply 34):
What? Are you sure? I have never heard of anything "Burning under water" I think thats impossible.

Ever see an underwater flare used by scuba divers for illumination?
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
User avatar
AA777223
Posts: 991
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 6:12 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:08 pm

Well, I stand corrected. I am not a chemist. Apologies for my ignorance.
A318/19/20/21, A300, A332/3, A343/6, A388, L1011, DC-9, DC-10, MD-11, MD-80, B722, B732/3/4/5/7/8/9, B743/4/4M, B752/3, B762/3/4, B772/E/W, B788/9, F-100, CRJ-200/700/900, ERJ-135/145/175, DH-8, ATR-72, DO-328, BAE-146
 
andrewuber
Posts: 2142
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 10:45 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:25 pm

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 15):
400F or more...

Boeing's 777 RTO test sent the brake temps to over 4,000 Celcius (which is approximately 7,232 degrees F). Molten wheels and brakes are incredibly hot. 400F is barely enough to bake cookies!

Drew
I'd rather shoot BAD_MOTIVE
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:32 pm

Quoting Dan2002 (Reply 27):
Link?

Sorry, Bootleg VHS tape.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:40 pm

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 15):
400F or more...



Quoting AndrewUber (Reply 38):
Boeing's 777 RTO test sent the brake temps to over 4,000 Celcius (which is approximately 7,232 degrees F). Molten wheels and brakes are incredibly hot. 400F is barely enough to bake cookies!

400F is more what you see (or measure) after a landing at a hot-and-high airport over the maximum quick turn weight, and the only value that I was personally aware of. That's certainly low when compared to the heat one would expect with a high-speed RTO at max gross, and the 400F figure was never intended as a maximum value, hence why I included the "or more" with it....  Smile
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
User avatar
LTU932
Posts: 13090
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 12:34 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:44 pm

After having watched the A346 RTO test and re-watching the 777 RTO test, I'd just like to have some confirmation on this: is the use of thrust reversers during a max energy RTO test forbidden?
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 3:13 pm

Back to the A340, here some shots of the aftermath...

http://www.aviationpics.de/test/a346/page_01.htm
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
LimaNiner
Posts: 272
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 2:32 pm

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 3:33 pm

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 30):
Yes, it's the A346 prototype which was doing this RTO test.

So to answer my earlier question, this is a true prototype that will never go into service with a customer, i.e., I might encounter it as a beer can if I'm lucky?

Quoting EMBQA (Reply 22):
It's done with Max Payload, Max speed... before Vr... and Max breaking...no TR's. The aircraft must come to a complete stop, start moving again under its own power, then wait for 3 minutes before the fire/rescue can approch.

Yikes -- there is a bad (sad) experience behind each of those requirements... Speaking as a pax today, I'm glad the requirements are so comprehensive and pessimistic.
 
brendows
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:55 pm

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 3:47 pm

Quoting LimaNiner (Reply 43):
So to answer my earlier question, this is a true prototype that will never go into service with a customer, i.e., I might encounter it as a beer can if I'm lucky?

This prototype is still being used by Airbus, just as they are using one A320, one A343 and will continue to use one of the A380s as test aircraft.

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 41):
After having watched the A346 RTO test and re-watching the 777 RTO test, I'd just like to have some confirmation on this: is the use of thrust reversers during a max energy RTO test forbidden?

Yes, I believe that's true, this is the test to test the brakes.
FAR Part 25 Sec. 25.109 (i) says the following:

Quote:
A flight test demonstration of the maximum brake kinetic energy accelerate-stop distance must be conducted with not more than 10 percent of the allowable brake wear range remaining on each of the airplane wheel brakes.

and as f-1 in the same sections says:

Quote:
(f) The effects of available reverse thrust--
(1) Shall not be included as an additional means of deceleration when determining the accelerate-stop distance on a dry runway
 
User avatar
LTU932
Posts: 13090
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 12:34 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 4:39 pm

Quoting LimaNiner (Reply 43):
So to answer my earlier question, this is a true prototype that will never go into service with a customer, i.e., I might encounter it as a beer can if I'm lucky?

Yes, it is. Airbus has kept the original prototype of the A346, which is F-WWCA (MSN 360).

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © French Frogs AirSlides
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jose Muñoz - Iberian Spotters

Airbus keeps some aircraft prototypes for test purposes. They have one A346, one A320, one A340 and the original A380 prototype, F-WWOW, will also stay at Airbus.
 
kevi747
Posts: 991
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:59 pm

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 6:43 pm

Quoting AA777223 (Reply 16):
I was finding myself very frustrated that the one firefighter who went in hardly sprayed any foam on the bogie. He kept looking back, making hand gestures, etc but hardly sprayed any foam where it was needed most. The rest of the Firefighters seemed MIA.

That's what I'm saying. The fire kept growing and he kept spraying the pavement. I was like, what the hell are you doing? Spray the fire!
"Reality has a well-known liberal bias." --Stephen Colbert
 
Carpethead
Posts: 2567
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 8:15 pm

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 8:09 pm

The very 1st 777 flies for Cathay Pacific as B-HNL and now powered by RR engines.
 
User avatar
AA777223
Posts: 991
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 6:12 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Mon Dec 11, 2006 11:10 pm

Quoting Carpethead (Reply 47):
The very 1st 777 flies for Cathay Pacific as B-HNL and now powered by RR engines.

That's interesting. I was under the impression it was a major ordeal to to change engine types on an aircraft like the 777, especially on one of the oldest frames. I would have assumed, since Boeing doesn't make pure test a/c, and that first tester was PW powered, that it initially went to UA. Is that not correct? I thought all of United's former 777s went to AI and Varig. I remember watching that video of the 777 RTO test, and being very impressed, no spoilers, no reverse thrust, only breaks, from above true V1 speed. To be honest I don't think I would want one of Boeing's test a/c after they beat the thing to hell like that!
A318/19/20/21, A300, A332/3, A343/6, A388, L1011, DC-9, DC-10, MD-11, MD-80, B722, B732/3/4/5/7/8/9, B743/4/4M, B752/3, B762/3/4, B772/E/W, B788/9, F-100, CRJ-200/700/900, ERJ-135/145/175, DH-8, ATR-72, DO-328, BAE-146
 
airbusA346
Posts: 7284
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 7:05 am

RE: A340 RTO Gone Wrong Video.

Tue Dec 12, 2006 3:05 am

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 45):

It has stayed with Airbus because it is not a proper certified version due to the overwing door missing on F-WWCA, but is present on the others.

It might look like it is there on the recent photos of F-WWCA since it was painted in the new livery, but the door is in fact painted on so it looks like all A346's AFAIK.

Tom.
Tom Walker '086' First Officer of a A318/A319 for Air Lambert - Hours Flown: 17 hour 05 minutes (last updated 24/12/05).

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos